If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

How do you classify a Pneumag?

I've been engaged in a friendly debate on Pbnation with this guy about Pneumags (and I guess any other gun that uses pneumatics to trip the sear). He says he does not consider them to be mechanical guns.

My point is simply: There are no electronics in them, therefore, they are mechanical.

I don't really see any reason to differentiate them from simpler mechanical guns. Granted, they are in a league of their own in the speed department, but only because the trigger is lighter. They still rely on user skill to shoot them fast, as there is no circuit board to monitor half-trigger pulls and whatnot.

Furthermore, there are no eyes to prevent chops - you must rely on mechanical methods to prevent that.

I've been engaged in a friendly debate on Pbnation with this guy about Pneumags (and I guess any other gun that uses pneumatics to trip the sear). He says he does not consider them to be mechanical guns.

I've been engaged in a friendly debate on Pbnation with this guy about Pneumags (and I guess any other gun that uses pneumatics to trip the sear). He says he does not consider them to be mechanical guns.

Don't feed the trolls and they will go away. You're right. He's wrong, leave it at that. You don't need validation from some PBN Dbag.

ok, uh...
this is some daft logic here.
and just to qualify myself I am a machinist, that builds paintball guns and I have degrees in design engineering and Advanced theoretical physics.
this is in no way a personal attack so please don't take offence.

Originally Posted by pump

mech guns your finger pulls the trigger which is directly linked to the gunWell yes, but all guns are connected to their triggers.
you might want to think of a way to re-phrase your point...

pneued guns the actuation of the trigger is done by the 3way hooked up to the ramNo. That is not correct. pulling the trigger depresses the valve/switch gas then moves the ram which trips the sear.
the ram does not at any time come into contact with the trigger.

also to say a pneumag or pneucocker is the same as mech is missing the point of pneuing those guns which is a shorter and lighter trigger pull leading higher rate of firebut a higher rate of fire was the whole reason that Glenn Palmer came up with the Pneumatic Automation system that gave birth to the semi-automatic paintball gun... a design that was promptly stolen and mass produced.

also the 3way valve used for pneued guns could also be replaced by a solenoid, and if my Aunt had balls she would be my uncle.
Sorry the fact you can replace parts with alternate parts is irrelevant.

and in the cases of the pneucockers the solenoid core is replaced with the 3way but the fitting from the noid is still used, making is less like a mech than it is like an electro,

The better question is do they break the spirit of the "mechs only" day/tournament/scenario games?

Not really. I mean, you can do the same thing with an R/T valve or a ULT on/off. Both facilitate speed, be it by lighter trigger pulls or speedier more forceful valve resetting. There seems to be a sort of petty jealousy from users of blowbacks and cockers because Tom Kaye happened to make a mechanical marker that was faster and chopped less... People have been mimicking the R/T effect with blowbacks and creating anti-chop bolts for years now, but it doesn't keep up.

That's not to say that Tippmanns and Spyders and 'Cockers are inferior markers, but frankly I can get a greater ROF out of my Classic Valve mags and those predate blowbacks entirely. Hell my 1996 Classic R/T is faster than my pneumag, and theres no way you can classify that as being more "new-fangled" than a Tippmann X-7 or something.

Correct me if I'm wrong (I know I'm not...) but the sear assembly of the stock Automag is not in any way attached to the trigger. The trigger is held to the frame by a single pin, and the sear hangs down into the frame where it is "bumped" by the trigger but not actually attached to anything other than the rail.

The old Vector had a pneumatic trigger.
Many of the 90s-era spoolers had pneumatic triggers (meaning, the trigger only actuated a 3way valve). ie Pheonix, Equalizer, Nova, etc

There seems to be a sort of petty jealousy from users of blowbacks and cockers because Tom Kaye happened to make a mechanical marker that was faster and chopped less..

My memory of the old school automags was they chopped paint more then any other gun, and the shootdown was horrific if you actually tried to fire fast. Those oldschool liquid blowbacks could run 40bps and never have any shootdown.... not that you could pull the trigger anywhere near that speed.

The better question is do they break the spirit of the "mechs only" day/tournament/scenario games?

I don't think so either. They are just the ultimate mechanical guns. Heck, before I put pneumag mods on mine, it was still faster than my mech cocker (which is oh so smooth). With a ULT, a Mag is walkable. I think if I'd had a trigger stop at that time it would have been fairly easy to walk, as a matter of fact. The pneumatic parts just make it easier yet.

I think that RT's might kind of cross the line of "mechs only" though - just because it's basically full auto.

Correct me if I'm wrong (I know I'm not...) but the sear assembly of the stock Automag is not in any way attached to the trigger. The trigger is held to the frame by a single pin, and the sear hangs down into the frame where it is "bumped" by the trigger but not actually attached to anything other than the rail.

Excellent point. I will bring that up if he decides to pursue the argument. By his rational, a regular Automag is not a mechanical gun...

but a higher rate of fire was the whole reason that Glenn Palmer came up with the Pneumatic Automation system that gave birth to the semi-automatic paintball gun... a design that was promptly stolen and mass produced.

You are half correct. The design was promptly used by others.

However, Glenn created the semi-auto pneumatic re-cocking system because of a shoulder injury he has. He didn't like to PUMP all the time to be able to play. Glenn did NOT create the semi-auto system simply for the higher rate of fire. Glenn has ALWAYS been against super high rates of fire in paintball. This is why he didn't allow the Pneu-Blazer , the RT Blazer or the Grinder (and originally the E-Blazer) to become a production gun.

The pneumag is a mechanical gun - in the sense that we judge mechanical guns in paintball. I guess technical it is a pneumatic-mechanical gun and there might be some discussion if it is a "true" mechanical gun, but I would assume the same discussion then applies to autocockers.

The problem I have with some people who insist they are "mechanical" is then they beg for mechanical only tournaments. These same people sometimes bemoan the rise of BPS in the sport and then seek to make the rules such that they have the BPS advantage. Up until this point I really don't worry about how one classifies it.

"Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot, nothing is going to get better. Its not" - Dr Suess

I think that RT's might kind of cross the line of "mechs only" though - just because it's basically full auto.

I think that is your (the general) main problem; mixing modes of operation with rate of fire. Even if a marker runs full auto, you can't say it's an electronic marker if it doesn't use batteries or circuits.

"Mech" and "electro" are too general as categories if you're trying to classify rates of fire. Admittedly, the drive for electros was an easy and dependable increase in rate of fire, but that doesn't restrict purely mechanical markers from going faster or electronic assisted markers from going slower.

I think that is your (the general) main problem; mixing modes of operation with rate of fire. Even if a marker runs full auto, you can't say it's an electronic marker if it doesn't use batteries or circuits.

"Mech" and "electro" are too general as categories if you're trying to classify rates of fire. Admittedly, the drive for electros was an easy and dependable increase in rate of fire, but that doesn't restrict purely mechanical markers from going faster or electronic assisted markers from going slower.

righto

if i made a mechanically triggered pnumatic gun that fired 1000 rounds a second ... it would still be a mechanically triggered pnumatic gun. it would still be a "mech" gun.

my single triggered tribal shoots about 8 BPS on a good day, but its still and electro.

My memory of the old school automags was they chopped paint more then any other gun, and the shootdown was horrific if you actually tried to fire fast. Those oldschool liquid blowbacks could run 40bps and never have any shootdown.... not that you could pull the trigger anywhere near that speed.

The whole point of the warp and RT was to correct those problems?

Eh, I wouldn't say that....

I had an anti-siphon kit and about 2 feet of coiled hose on my early lvl7 classics and never had a problem with c02. They always seemed to cycle better/faster than everything else around without blending paint. If you had problems with chopping and chuffing that was usually more to do with poor tuning/maintenance and sloppy play than with the marker itself.

Also, I know STBBs can reach very high rates of fire, but I don't remember anything field-legal that could get over 8bps until about 1999 or so. What marker is it that you're thinking of specifically?

Well, either the search button on the new forum works a little too well, or somebody browsed through a couple hundred pages in the "Paintball Talk" subforum before finding a thread that deserved a reply. lol